Texas Rape Survivors Billed for Rape Kits

[waggy]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: Double Trouble
The 1/4 to 1/2 is a complete BS stat of course, but that's besides the point.

I agree that the policy of billing a victim for a rape kit is morally indefensible. Someone in TX needs to fix it, stat.

No, sadly, it's not a "BS" stat. To be more accurate I should have said 1/4 to 1/3, but I've seen studies where the number is near 50%. It depends on the population being studied, women in the military tend to have even higher rates than civilians. As I mentioned above, I spent my entire last semester writing three research papers on the subject of female college rape victims.

The vast majority of rapes are acquaintance rapes, typically involving alcohol or drugs, and typically occurring during the first two years of college (Freshman are by far at highest risk). I also helped to create and conduct a study for my advanced research class that had similar findings.

The "hook up" culture has made it much worse. Women go out, get absolutely wasted, and wake up in someone else's room with no idea how they got there. Legal Consent cannot be obtained while you are inebriated, and such a situation meets the legal definition of rape.

Oh, and since it'll come up sooner or later, my name is Carmen, but I'm male.

i've had sex that i don't remember, was i raped?


*i'm a dude

im sorry about that. next time i will make sure to wake you. :lips:

 

[Carmen813]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: Carmen813
There are many different situations where woman get raped. Consenting because you feel physical coercion isn't consenting at all. Consenting because you fear the man will leave you isn't not consent, that is simply another form of psychological coercion.

How do you define physical coercion? Shouldn't some actual or actual implied threat of force be involved? I'm just having a difficult time believing that about 10% or so of the college educated male population are rapists. I don't believe it.

Also, I'm fully aware that academia is infested with Marxist-Feminists who want to paint males as primitive, if not outright evil, Neanderthals. Hence, any of these studies that result in shocking numbers need to be taken with rocks of salt, especially after the bogus claims that women earn less than men for the same amount of work and effort have been refuted (yet the media still says men earn 77 cents for every dollar men earn ignoring the context of having to consider equal work and effort.)

There are many types of coercion, both physical and psychological. For example, threatening to beat up a woman if she doesn't have sex with you is physical. Threatening to leave your wife if she doesn't have sex with you is psychological. Both of them are coercive, and I think it doesn't take much imagination to think of other scenarios.

It has nothing to do with "marxist-feminists" in academia (which is one of the most silly phrases I've ever heard). Yes, there are anti-male professors, just as there are anti-female professors. I've had my experience with both of them, including the ones who specifically pick on female students in the classroom. If you are only going to consider research from people you agree with valid, you are already making a fundamental scientific error. There is nothing wrong with feminism at it's core, which is essentially the believe that women deserve equal rights and protections.

Rather than arguing with me about it, when you have never even read the research, go look it up. I don't expect you to take my word at face value, but I've seen enough studies to have been convinced. Most of this research is free to the public, go to your local library and read. The methodology, statistical analysis, and conclusions are all there in black and white for you to draw conclusions from yourself.

 

[Carmen813]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: n yusef

Originally posted by: Cattlegod
so if someone gets shot by a gun, hit by a car, or are poisoned they shouldn't have to pay the bill to have their life saved if they don't know who did it? Who do you suggest pays? I sure as hell don't want my tax money going to that stuff, I have insurance for a reason.

Do you know what a rape kit is? It's a test to gather evidence about the crime, not medical care. Billing victims for rape kits is a pay-for-play judicial system. It is morally indefensible.

But it is still a service that I would assume is provided by doctors. They have to bill someone for the service. I dont think the state should be first in line to receive such bills. I have little problem with insurance and the investigating authority being in first in line to receive to the bill and without a doubt the state should be at the end of line for receiving the bill.

They do not need to be performed by doctors. They can be performed by nurses, and they are extremely cheap. The states primary job is to enforce the law and prosecute criminals. It should be paid for by the state, then the state should bill the perp.

Consider it under the same category as the state hiring an expert witness when prosecuting a case.

 

[Carmen813]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: Double Trouble
The 1/4 to 1/2 is a complete BS stat of course, but that's besides the point.

I agree that the policy of billing a victim for a rape kit is morally indefensible. Someone in TX needs to fix it, stat.

No, sadly, it's not a "BS" stat. To be more accurate I should have said 1/4 to 1/3, but I've seen studies where the number is near 50%. It depends on the population being studied, women in the military tend to have even higher rates than civilians. As I mentioned above, I spent my entire last semester writing three research papers on the subject of female college rape victims.

The vast majority of rapes are acquaintance rapes, typically involving alcohol or drugs, and typically occurring during the first two years of college (Freshman are by far at highest risk). I also helped to create and conduct a study for my advanced research class that had similar findings.

The "hook up" culture has made it much worse. Women go out, get absolutely wasted, and wake up in someone else's room with no idea how they got there. Legal Consent cannot be obtained while you are inebriated, and such a situation meets the legal definition of rape.

Oh, and since it'll come up sooner or later, my name is Carmen, but I'm male.

i've had sex that i don't remember, was i raped?


*i'm a dude

Depends on the circumstances, if your partner was sober and you were not, then yes, you meet the legal definition of having been raped. Your gender has no influence on it the legality of how consent has to be obtained.

Just not remembering sex that you had doesn't not mean you were raped. I've probably had sex with my wife thousands of times, I don't remember each of them

 

[n yusef]

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: Double Trouble
The 1/4 to 1/2 is a complete BS stat of course, but that's besides the point.

I agree that the policy of billing a victim for a rape kit is morally indefensible. Someone in TX needs to fix it, stat.

No, sadly, it's not a "BS" stat. To be more accurate I should have said 1/4 to 1/3, but I've seen studies where the number is near 50%. It depends on the population being studied, women in the military tend to have even higher rates than civilians. As I mentioned above, I spent my entire last semester writing three research papers on the subject of female college rape victims.

The vast majority of rapes are acquaintance rapes, typically involving alcohol or drugs, and typically occurring during the first two years of college (Freshman are by far at highest risk). I also helped to create and conduct a study for my advanced research class that had similar findings.

The "hook up" culture has made it much worse. Women go out, get absolutely wasted, and wake up in someone else's room with no idea how they got there. Legal Consent cannot be obtained while you are inebriated, and such a situation meets the legal definition of rape.

Oh, and since it'll come up sooner or later, my name is Carmen, but I'm male.

i've had sex that i don't remember, was i raped?


*i'm a dude

Depends on the circumstances, if your partner was sober and you were not, then yes, you meet the legal definition of having been raped. Your gender has no influence on it the legality of how consent has to be obtained.

That's not entirely correct. The soberness of the offender isn't important to the question of rape; I assume that many male rapists are in some way intoxicated, and we do not treat them with leniency because.

 

[Carmen813]

I won't argue that the system is not biased against male rape victims, because it is. Societal beliefs play a factor. You need to convince a jury, and each member will come in with their own beliefs and biases. It's hard for a man to convince a jury he was raped in a typical date rape scenario. Men are expected to "always want sex," many believe women should play "hard to get" and offer "token resistance." A lot of biases exist out there.

Overcoming these mindsets is a major goal of sexual assertiveness training.

The research into rape doesn't typically use the legal definition, because many rape victims do not even consider themselves to have been raped. There is psychological damage control that individuals undergo to prevent being labeled a victim. Questions are asked in a way to unveil the truth without implying that people are victims. One of the main tools you can look up and read about is the Sexual Experiences Survey.

Just by being male and reading some of this stuff you will automatically attempt to compensate (cognitive dissonance) to explain the perpetrators behavior, because you can identify with perpetrators a lot more easily than you can with a victim.

 

[glutenberg]

Originally posted by: WhipperSnapper

Originally posted by: Carmen813Something like 1/4 to 1/2 of all college woman meet the legal definition of having been raped during their college career. It's just disturbing.

My understanding of the situation is that Marxist-Feminists have defined rape to be so broad that it ends up encompassing huge amounts of women who haven't been raped resulting in that obviously bogus stat. There's even a professor of law who once infamously said "all sex is rape."

If a woman is a little bit drunk and consents to sex, is that rape? If a woman consents to sex and then feels badly about it later, is that rape? If a guy lies to a woman and tells her that he's a movie star and she consents to sex, is that rape?

The bogus claim that most women are victims of rape along with the bogus claim that women aren't paid the same for equal work is just part of the too often unrecognized war our society is waging against males. To learn more, read the books "The Myth of Male Power" and "Why Men Earn More" (they work longer and harder at less pleasant and less safe jobs) by former NOW board member and male feminist-turned men's rights advocate Warren Farrell.

Catherine MacKinnon

Not her statement although she does have some wild views.

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: whylaff

Originally posted by: engineereeyore
Why not just make payment for rape kits conditional upon results? The idea of rape seriously bothers and concerns me, so I certainly think such services need to be available to any woman at any time. However, considering the number of false rape allegations, why not take such a stance? Additionally, if rape is every proven at some later point in time, the cost should be refundable.

Just an idea.

Yeah. Sure. :roll:

Hey, why don?t we just charge everyone who reports a crime with falsifying a police report? We?ll just drop the charges and let them out of jail after it?s proven that they weren?t lying. I doubt it would discourage anyone from reporting a crime, I mean, what could they possibly have to worry about?

I have no problem whatsoever with charging someone who falsifies a police report. It certainly shouldn't be left to everyday tax payers to foot the bill for police work done for someone who deliberately lied about an incident. Why shouldn't they have to pay for it?

If you want a rape analysis performed on you because you were raped, you should dang well have that option available to you. But if you're full of crap and you're just trying to get someone in trouble, it should be your responsibility to repay the tax payers for the cost of a rap kit.

If you would like to provide a legitimate reason to the contrary, I'd love to hear it. But if all you're going to do is roll your eyes, then get lost.

 

[Carmen813]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: whylaff

Originally posted by: engineereeyore
Why not just make payment for rape kits conditional upon results? The idea of rape seriously bothers and concerns me, so I certainly think such services need to be available to any woman at any time. However, considering the number of false rape allegations, why not take such a stance? Additionally, if rape is every proven at some later point in time, the cost should be refundable.

Just an idea.

Yeah. Sure. :roll:

Hey, why don?t we just charge everyone who reports a crime with falsifying a police report? We?ll just drop the charges and let them out of jail after it?s proven that they weren?t lying. I doubt it would discourage anyone from reporting a crime, I mean, what could they possibly have to worry about?

I have no problem whatsoever with charging someone who falsifies a police report. It certainly shouldn't be left to everyday tax payers to foot the bill for police work done for someone who deliberately lied about an incident. Why shouldn't they have to pay for it?

If you want a rape analysis performed on you because you were raped, you should dang well have that option available to you. But if you're full of crap and you're just trying to get someone in trouble, it should be your responsibility to repay the tax payers for the cost of a rap kit.

If you would like to provide a legitimate reason to the contrary, I'd love to hear it. But if all you're going to do is roll your eyes, then get lost.

My concern would be confusion amongst victims. Such a system sounds good on paper, but if victims are afraid they will get hit with the cost of a rape kit because they do not understand the law, and thus avoid getting the test, that could be bad.

Honestly though the entire discussion shouldn't really matter. The kits are extremely cheap to perform, they do not cost thousands of dollars like some have implied.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: Double Trouble
The 1/4 to 1/2 is a complete BS stat of course, but that's besides the point.

I agree that the policy of billing a victim for a rape kit is morally indefensible. Someone in TX needs to fix it, stat.

No, sadly, it's not a "BS" stat. To be more accurate I should have said 1/4 to 1/3, but I've seen studies where the number is near 50%. It depends on the population being studied, women in the military tend to have even higher rates than civilians. As I mentioned above, I spent my entire last semester writing three research papers on the subject of female college rape victims.

The vast majority of rapes are acquaintance rapes, typically involving alcohol or drugs, and typically occurring during the first two years of college (Freshman are by far at highest risk). I also helped to create and conduct a study for my advanced research class that had similar findings.

The "hook up" culture has made it much worse. Women go out, get absolutely wasted, and wake up in someone else's room with no idea how they got there. Legal Consent cannot be obtained while you are inebriated, and such a situation meets the legal definition of rape.

Oh, and since it'll come up sooner or later, my name is Carmen, but I'm male.

i've had sex that i don't remember, was i raped?


*i'm a dude

Depends on the circumstances, if your partner was sober and you were not, then yes, you meet the legal definition of having been raped. Your gender has no influence on it the legality of how consent has to be obtained.

Just not remembering sex that you had doesn't not mean you were raped. I've probably had sex with my wife thousands of times, I don't remember each of them

so if she was drunk and i was drunk its not rape?

what about the other way around? can I rape women if we are both drunk?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Carmen813

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: n yusef

Originally posted by: Cattlegod


They do not need to be performed by doctors. They can be performed by nurses, and they are extremely cheap. The states primary job is to enforce the law and prosecute criminals. It should be paid for by the state, then the state should bill the perp.

Like i said, law enforcement and insurance should be the first ones to pick up the bill. ANd the state should be the last in lines for it.

 

[manowar821]

Originally posted by: cubby1223
^^^

You know what? Life ain't fair. We *all* have our own set of injustices that don't get paid for by the government. Deal with it.

Self reliance is a wonderful thing that liberals have destroyed.

Rape victims should get a free ride through their journey to "justice". Jesus christ in hell, you're an ass.

 

[Cuda1447]

I agree that rape is a major problem. I also agree that consenting due to fear of physical harm should be considered rape. But I hear a lot of people in this thread talking about psychological coercion. That's such a freaking gray area, that gets to be a bit ridiculous. Rape is a MAJOR fucking deal. We can't go throwing guys in jail because they 'tricked' a girl into sex. If a girl gets drunk and has sex (within reason) that's not rape. We can't be punishing people for girls having sex while they are drunk and then regretting it the next day. Certainly there is a difference between a girl being passed out drunk and being raped and a girl being tipsy, going home with a guy, having drunk sex and then regretting it the next day when there head is more clear. I don't mean to belittle the horrid crime of rape, but at the same time if we were to allow this definition of rape to be as broad and encompassing as some on these boards would like it to be, I fear a vast majority of us would be guilty of rape. I have to mention again psychological coercion. Back in the day I think that used to be called having 'game'. Again, there is a line... there is def. some rape on one side of the line, but we have to be careful of where we draw this line. This is a MAJOR accusation.


I think at the end of the day we have to take a look and say "Did this guy really, purposely, knowingly take advantage of this girl and force sex on her?". If not, you have to really be careful of calling that rape.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: cubby1223
Please, the only reason this is a news story here is because it occurred in Texas. I bet the same things happen all around the country, including in the "blue states".

Most precisely.

 

[amdhunter]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: Carmen813
Rape victims are treated pretty damn poorly, which is why it's one of the least reported, yet most common, crimes in the country. Something like 1/4 to 1/2 of all college woman meet the legal definition of having been raped during their college career. It's just disturbing.

Rape kits themselves are extremely cheap, like 20 dollars. Then again, what would you expect from the state that only made it illegal for men to rape their wives in the 1990s?

I've heard stats like that, but honestly if that's true, either I'm completely ignorant, which is possible, or the legal definition is extremely broad--too broad. I know that more people qualify as alcoholics than I think prudent, based on the extremely broad definition of alcoholism.

Anyway, I thought it was ok to make fun of China billing family members for the bullet used to put to death one of their own, and this seems similar in imprudence.

LOL 1/2? What a retarded number. I bet that "1/2" statistic would be much lower if they took into account that many of these women led the guys on and regretted it in the morning - thus "making" it rape. Sadly, most women who have been so-called "raped" asked for it at one point.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Double Trouble
The 1/4 to 1/2 is a complete BS stat of course, but that's besides the point.

I agree that the policy of billing a victim for a rape kit is morally indefensible. Someone in TX needs to fix it, stat.

Ditto.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Carmen813
Threatening to leave your wife if she doesn't have sex with you is psychological.

That's rape? Your entire argument just went out the window.

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: Carmen813
I've probably had sex with my wife thousands of times, I don't remember each of them

How many times have you raped her?

Edit: So as not to sound like a complete ass (though I may very well be) I'll ask this. Have you ever promised to do a household chore if your wife had sex with you? Is that also not coercion? She wants the dishes done, so she consents to sex.

Tell us Carmen, are you a rapist?

 

[Vette73]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: cubby1223
Please, the only reason this is a news story here is because it occurred in Texas. I bet the same things happen all around the country, including in the "blue states".

Most precisely.

Oh really, and your links are...

 

[Carmen813]

Since people seem skeptical.

http://www.aauw.org/advocacy/l...rary/assault_stats.cfm
http://www.womens-self-defense...com/college-crime.html
http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0ge...nili78/EXP=1242144792/**http%3a//www.oneinfourusa.org/attachments/statistics.pdf
http://www.ucmo.edu/x91467.xml
http://www.rainn.org/get-infor...sexual-assault-victims

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/...ry.sexabuse/index.html

A congresswoman said Thursday that her "jaw dropped" when military doctors told her that four in 10 women at a veterans hospital reported being sexually assaulted while in the military.

As I said later, to be more accurate, I should have said 1/4 to 1/3. The percentage rises when you look at other types of sexual assault that do not include penetrating rape (i.e, attempted rape, coercion or unwanted touching). It also changes depending on the population of individuals involved, military tends to be higher.

 

[TheDoc9]

Unbelievably I read through most of this thread. Carmen is on a crusade, while mike and whipper seem to have actual have real life experience with multiple women.

By Carmens definition, anyone who has had experience growing up, trying to find out about life and dating people is a rapest. Allow me to explain, once when I was in HS, I teased a girl in the back of my dads bronco until she was about ready to pop. Well, I was a virgin at the time and wasn't about to lose it to her. But she had other ideas, she held me down - unbelievable how strong women can be when it comes to something they want. I was telling her no, to stop - needles to say she was really really close to taking my virginity that night until I threw her off of me. Is she a rapest?

I even woke up once to another broad riding me in the middle of the night. I certainly didn't consent to that. Should I have called the police?

It's no wonder those rape stats are so high, everything short of signing a legal document is considered rape! Imagine even suggesting, in the heat of the moment, if it's ok to have sex. LOL. Talk about never getting laid. 40 year old virgin ftw!

Women are WORSE than men when it comes to sex and their fantasies put anything a man could imagine to shame. It's too bad so few men realize this.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: Carmen813For example, threatening to beat up a woman if she doesn't have sex with you is physical.

And I doubt that anyone would argue with you about that.

Threatening to leave your wife if she doesn't have sex with you is psychological.

That type of coercion is perfectly legitimate. Is it necessarily immoral to break off a relationship if it is no longer in your self interest? If a woman decides that she'd prefer to consent to sex rather than lose her boyfriend or husband, is that rape or her just making a decision about what is more valuable to her? That is outright consent.

I don't want to go to work but I do because I want the money--in your view, am I a slave?

Both of them are coercive, and I think it doesn't take much imagination to think of other scenarios.

Sure, they're both "coercive", it's just that threatening to end a voluntary relationship unless sex is offered doesn't constitute rape. Of course, if your goal is portray women as being severely victimized by society and to portray men as evil excrement-grubbing sex-crazed monsters then it might make sense to have a purposely overly broad definition of rape.

It has nothing to do with "marxist-feminists" in academia (which is one of the most silly phrases I've ever heard). Yes, there are anti-male professors, just as there are anti-female professors. I've had my experience with both of them, including the ones who specifically pick on female students in the classroom. If you are only going to consider research from people you agree with valid, you are already making a fundamental scientific error. There is nothing wrong with feminism at it's core, which is essentially the believe that women deserve equal rights and protections.

There is in fact a group of predominantly female professors, many of whom have questionable academic merit, who fall into the category of Marxist-Feminists. For a good time, read professor KC Johnson's blog Durham in Wonderland where he investigates the "Group of 88", a nefarious group of leftist professors who tried to send three innocent people to jail and who, to this day, as far as I know, refuse to apologize for their moral crimes.

Rather than arguing with me about it, when you have never even read the research, go look it up. I don't expect you to take my word at face value, but I've seen enough studies to have been convinced. Most of this research is free to the public, go to your local library and read. The methodology, statistical analysis, and conclusions are all there in black and white for you to draw conclusions from yourself.

...And I suppose that I could refer you to all sorts of books and articles on the subject that point in the other direction, but I don't expect people to do things they wouldn't otherwise take the time and effort to do for a debate on a discussion forum that will soon be long forgotten. If I were a professor of Men's Studies or of Sociology then I'd feel obligated to do this but since I don't receive any compensation for my posts here I don't feel any obligation.

I guess the take home message on both sides is, "There are opposing views and some people think you are very wrong and biased." (It's nothing new.)

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: Carmen813The research into rape doesn't typically use the legal definition, because many rape victims do not even consider themselves to have been raped.

Which is just more evidence that the definition of "rape" has been purposely defined for ideological reasons to be overly broad.

 

[Carmen813]

Originally posted by: TheDoc9
Unbelievably I read through most of this thread. Carmen is on a crusade, while mike and whipper seem to have actual have real life experience with multiple women.

By Carmens definition, anyone who has had experience growing up, trying to find out about life and dating people is a rapest. Allow me to explain, once when I was in HS, I teased a girl in the back of my dads bronco until she was about ready to pop. Well, I was a virgin at the time and wasn't about to lose it to her. But she had other ideas, she held me down - unbelievable how strong women can be when it comes to something they want. I was telling her no, to stop - needles to say she was really really close to taking my virginity that night until I threw her off of me. Is she a rapest?

I even woke up once to another broad riding me in the middle of the night. I certainly didn't consent to that. Should I have called the police?

It's no wonder those rape stats are so high, everything short of signing a legal document is considered rape! Imagine even suggesting, in the heat of the moment, if it's ok to have sex. LOL. Talk about never getting laid. 40 year old virgin ftw!

Women are WORSE than men when it comes to sex and their fantasies put anything a man could imagine to shame. It's too bad so few men realize this.

Straw man, here's a match.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore
If you want a rape analysis performed on you because you were raped, you should dang well have that option available to you. But if you're full of crap and you're just trying to get someone in trouble, it should be your responsibility to repay the tax payers for the cost of a rape kit.

The women who make false accusations of rape are just as horrible as the rapists themselves. With their accusation, even if a man is later revealed to be completely innocent, they could inflict a huge amount of economic damage on someone.

It is a travesty that our laws do not protect men from the crime of false accusation. The perpetrators should be made to pay triple damages to their victims and/or whatever is needed to put the victimized men back into the position they would have been in but for the false accusation and then they should receive the same sentence the man would have received had they been found guilty of rape.

The false accuser in the Duke Lacrosse hoax was never prosecuted at all even though the worst punishment was a mere $500 fine. (In other words, false accusation of rape is essentially legal in North Carolina.) Instead, she and the other perpetrators of the hoax (Nifong and others) should have been made to serve years of jail time. I hope that the City of Durham, the county, the Group of 88, and Duke University are sued into bankruptcy in order to send a message to other municipalities and unjust prosecutors.